t32 = −1.06, P = 0.300). In addition, we tested for effects of relatively increased CS− as compared to CS+ processing within a mirror-symmetric frontal region in the left hemisphere, as well as for differential effects across hemispheres. While there was no significant Session × Valence interaction in the left hemisphere (P > 0.05), the three-way interaction with Hemisphere marginally reached significance (F1,32 = 3.62, P = 0.066). The localisation of the above analysed effects fitted CT99021 our expectations, as regions for sensory auditory processing and areas selleck chemicals llc in parietal and frontal cortex as part of a distributed attentional network were highlighted in the analysis. Though unexpected, one further

neural generator cluster at the right occipitocerebral junction (the spatial resolution of the MEG in combination with the applied head and conductivity models does not allow a more distinct localisation of effects) showed a significant Session × Valence interaction (F1,32 = 8.02, P = 0.008) with relatively increased CS+ compared to CS− processing. Interestingly, this area also reveals an interaction with Hemisphere (F1,32 = 9.3, P = 0.005) when compared to a corresponding left hemispheric region although the relatively increased CS− processing in the left hemisphere was not significant. To summarise the MEG data, we found an affect-specific modulation of the event-related fields that were recorded in response to multiple click-like tones before and after MultiCS conditioning: in the pre- vs. post-conditioning comparison, the emotion effect was strongest between 100

and 150 ms after CS onset within a left-hemispheric posterior sensor cluster with relatively stronger RMS amplitudes for CS− as compared to CS+ processing. Source localisation for this time-interval overlapping the auditory N1m revealed that the presence Phosphatidylethanolamine N-methyltransferase of emotionally salient stimuli affected auditory processing mainly in two neural generator clusters in the left parietotemporal and the right prefrontal cortex. The data suggested that aversively conditioned tones were preferentially processed in the right hemisphere, while unpaired CS evoked stronger brain activation in the left hemisphere. For the parietotemporal region, this assumption was statistically supported by an interaction of the emotion effect with hemisphere. For the frontal source cluster, a trend pointed towards the same interpretation. Contrary to our assumptions, the presence of shock-conditioned tones did not significantly modulate AEFs in the earlier P20–50 m time-interval.